DOCSLIB.ORG

The Elevation of the Project Is Approximately 4,000 Feet Above Sea Level

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Elevation of the Project Is Approximately 4,000 Feet Above Sea Level Pecos River Water Salvage Project Jedediah S. Rogers Historic Reclamation Projects Bureau of Reclamation 2009 Reformatted, reedited, reprinted by Andrew H. Gahan August 2013 Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................. i Pecos River Basin Water Salvage Project .......................................................................... 1 Project Location .............................................................................................................. 1 Historic Setting ............................................................................................................... 2 Investigations .................................................................................................................. 4 Authorization .................................................................................................................. 8 The Plan .......................................................................................................................... 8 Construction and Rehabilitation Program ....................................................................... 9 Operation & Maintenance ............................................................................................. 12 Ecology and Hydrology ................................................................................................ 13 Continued Challenges ................................................................................................... 17 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 19 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................... 20 Manuscript and Archival Collections ........................................................................... 20 Government Documents ............................................................................................... 20 Books, Articles and Other Reports ............................................................................... 21 Internet Sources ............................................................................................................ 22 Index ................................................................................................................................. 23 Pecos River Basin Water Salvage Project Although the Bureau of Reclamation is not usually connected to the business of vegetative eradication, the Pecos River Basin Water Salvage Project in New Mexico and Texas did just that—a large-scale attempt to control phreatophytes (high water- consuming plants) in the Pecos River basin. The consumption of water by phreatophytes, especially the invasive, nonnative saltcedar, is a continuing problem in the arid and semiarid regions of the western United States. When the clearing operations began in 1967, there were over 200,000 acres of saltcedar in the project area consuming an estimated five or six acre feet of water per year per acre.1 In the Pecos River basin, where water is in short supply, the impact of this invasive growth was particularly acute, necessitating the need for a government-funded salvage project to rid the area of saltcedar and other phreatophytes. Project Location The Pecos River originates in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains of north-central New Mexico and cuts through the semi-arid landscape of eastern New Mexico and western Texas. In all, the Pecos River basin extends some 525 miles to its mouth on the Rio Grande. The area features short winters and long, hot summers. Annual rainfall averages close to thirteen inches—most of that during the monsoon season—but precipitation is often erratic and departs commonly from the average. 1 R. J. Tipton, “One or the Other: A Resume of Pecos River Problems,” speech given in Santa Fe on February 9, 1953, 6, in RG 115, Records of the Bureau of Reclamation, Project Reports, ACC # 8NN-115- 85-019, Box 950, National Archives and Records Administration–Rocky Mountain Region, Denver, Colorado; hereafter cited as RG 115. The project area encompasses nearly the entire length of the basin. Reclamation planned to clear phreatophytes in sections along the flood plain of the Pecos River all the way from Santa Rosa, New Mexico, to Girvin, Texas. The project is roughly bounded by U.S. Highway 66 to the north and U.S. Highway 67 to the south. Along that stretch of the Pecos River are four major earth dams in four New Mexico counties (Guadalupe, DeBaca, Chaves, and Eddy) and three Texas counties (Loving, Reeves, and Ward).2 Historic Setting For thousands of years the Pecos River has been a source of life for plants, animals, and humans. Yet for all its life-giving qualities in the dry deserts of the Southwest, the poor water quality of the Pecos River is almost legendary. Native Americans are said to have complained “about the effects of Pecos water on the human digestive system.” As Lieutenant S. G. French of the U.S. Corps of Topographical Engineers described it in 1849, “It is a narrow deep stream, its waters turbid and bitter, and … [it carries] more impurities than any other river of the south. The only inhabitants of its waters are catfish.” Indeed, the river’s high salinity levels are responsible for numerous animal and human deaths over the years. For early settlers who wanted to be sure to drink clean water, a good rule of thumb was to observe where animals returned over and over again to drink water. There they were sure to find a clean source.3 The Pecos River basin faces other problems besides salt, silt, and dirt. The river’s water is over appropriated, which means that there is a perennial shortage for even existing water users. Add the usual southwestern phenomena of droughts and floods to 2 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Final Environmental Statement, Pecos River Basin Water Salvage Project, New Mexico-Texas, Southwest Regional Office, Amarillo, Texas, 1979, B-1. 3 Quoted in R. Jensen, C. Hart, M. Mecke, and W. Hatler, The Influence of Human Activities on the Waters of the Pecos Basin of Texas, TWRI technical report SR-2006-03, 2006, 8; Stephen Bogener, Ditches Across the Desert: Irrigation in the Lower Pecos Valley (Lubbock: Texas Tech University Press, 2003), 15. Pecos River Basin Water Salvage Project Historic Reclamation Projects Page 2 this equation, and a volatile situation arises. The 1888-1889 drought is best know for the number of cattle deaths on the range, but other dry spells over the last century have been almost as severe. Major floods, like Hurricane Alice on the lower Pecos River in 1954, contributed to sedimentation and caused property damage.4 Each problem is connected in some way to the infestation of the saltcedar (Tamarisk ramosissima) in the Pecos River basin. The spread of non-native phreatophytes, particularly the saltcedar, is partly responsible for poor water quality, low flow volume, silt buildup, channel morphology, and disturbed wildlife.5 Americans welcomed the plant from Europe in the early 1800s as an ornamental decoration and then, in the early twentieth century, as a means of stabilizing stream banks in the Southwest. When the plant spread, however, digging its roots deep in such river systems as the Gila, Salt, Pecos, Colorado, and Rio Grande, it became clear that its vices far outnumbered its virtues. As R. J. Tipton, a consultant to the Pecos Water Commission, explained in 1951, the proliferation of saltcedar in the McMillan Delta in southeastern New Mexico initially had positive impacts that were in the long run outweighed by negative impacts: These cedars spread rapidly and performed a useful function for the Carlsbad Irrigation District. They effectively provided a strainer for the silty water coming down the river, thereby causing the silt to deposit in the delta area and to extend farther upstream, permitting only the fairly clear water to enter the reservoir… However, in performing this useful function for man, the salt cedars took their toll in terms of consumption of large quantities of water.6 The saltcedar consumes large quantities of water because its deep roots are well adaptable to the dry, desert environment and to saline soil. It contributes to salinity in the 4 Jensen, et al., The Influence of Human Activities on the Waters of the Pecos Basin of Texas, 4. 5 Jeffrey Lovich, “A Brief Review of the Impacts of Tamarisk, or Saltcedar on Biodiversity in the New World,” http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/docs/news/workshopSep96/lovich.html (accessed February 6, 2008). 6 Tipton speech, 3, in RG 115, Project Reports, ACC # 8NN-115-85-019, Box 950. Pecos River Basin Water Salvage Project Historic Reclamation Projects Page 3 soil and water from the salt it gathers from below the surface and deposits above ground. Saltcedars can reach heights of 12 to 15 feet and settle in dense thickets, choking out native plants and trees along riparian corridors. In the Southwest, where they occupy some one million acres of real estate, they alter, in dramatic ways, local ecosystems and economies.7 Investigations Of all the vices of the saltcedar, the most alarming was its heavy use of precious desert water. Early on, it was by no means clear just how much water these plants consumed—perhaps one acre of saltcedar used five or six acre feet per year. No estimate was absolute, since consumptive use of water depends on any number of environmental factors.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Native Fish Fauna of Major Drainages East of The
    THE NATIVE FISH FAUNA OF MAJOR DRAINAGES EAST OF THE CONTINENTAL DIVIDE IN NEW MEXICO A Thesis Presented to the Graduate Faculty of Biology Eastern New Mexico University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements fdr -the7Degree: Master of Science in Biology by Michael D. Hatch December 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction Study Area Procedures Results and Discussion Summary Acknowledgements Literature Cited Appendices Abstract INTRODUCTION r (t. The earliest impression of New Mexico's native fish fauna =Ems during the 1850's from naturalists attached to various government survey parties. Without the collections from these and other early surveys, the record of the native fish fauna would be severely deficient because, since that time, some 1 4 native species - or subspecies of fish have become extirpated and the ranges of an additionial 22 native species or subspecies have become severly re- stricted. Since the late Miocene, physiographical changes of drainages have linked New Mexico, to varying degrees, with contemporary ichthyofaunal elements or their progenitors from the Rocky Mountains, the Great Plains, the Chihuahuan Desert, the Mexican Plateau, the Sonoran Desert and the Great Basin. Immigra- tion from these areas contributed to the diversity of the state's native ichthyofauna. Over the millinea, the fate of these fishes waxed and waned in ell 4, response to the changing physical and _chenaca-l-conditions of the surrounding environment. Ultimately, one of the most diverse fish faunas of any of the interior southwestern states developed. Fourteen families comprising 67 species of fish are believed to have occupied New Mexico's waters historically, with strikingly different faunas evolving east and west of the Continental Divide.
    [Show full text]
  • Volumetric Survey of RED BLUFF RESERVOIR November 2011 Survey
    Volumetric Survey of RED BLUFF RESERVOIR November 2011 Survey February 2013 Texas Water Development Board Billy R. Bradford Jr., Chairman Joe M. Crutcher, Vice Chairman Lewis H. McMahan, Member Edward G. Vaughan, Member Monte Cluck, Member F.A. “Rick” Rylander, Member Melanie Callahan, Executive Administrator Prepared for: Red Bluff Water Power Control District Authorization for use or reproduction of any original material contained in this publication, i.e. not obtained from other sources, is freely granted. The Board would appreciate acknowledgement. This report was prepared by staff of the Surface Water Resources Division: Ruben S. Solis, Ph.D., P.E. Jason J. Kemp, Team Leader Tony Connell Holly Holmquist Tyler McEwen, E.I.T., C.F.M Nathan Brock Published and distributed by the P.O. Box 13231, Austin, TX 78711-3231 Executive summary In December, 2011, the Texas Water Development Board entered into agreement with Red Bluff Water Power Control District to perform a volumetric survey of Red Bluff Reservoir. Surveying was performed using a multi-frequency (200 kHz, 50 kHz, and 24 kHz), sub-bottom profiling depth sounder. However, only the 200 kHz frequency was used for data collection. Red Bluff Dam and Red Bluff Reservoir are located on the Pecos River, a tributary of the Rio Grande, five miles north of Orla, Texas. The current operating level of Red Bluff Reservoir is 2,827.4 feet above mean sea level, the elevation of the crest of the service spillway. TWDB collected bathymetric data for Red Bluff Reservoir on November 29, 2011, and November 30, 2011. The daily average water surface elevations during that time ranged between 2,795.43 and 2,795.46 feet above mean sea level, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Program 2013-2018 Appendix A
    Appendix A 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) As required under Sections 303(d) and 304(a) of the federal Clean Water Act, this list identifies the water bodies in or bordering Texas for which effluent limitations are not stringent enough to implement water quality standards, and for which the associated pollutants are suitable for measurement by maximum daily load. In addition, the TCEQ also develops a schedule identifying Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that will be initiated in the next two years for priority impaired waters. Issuance of permits to discharge into 303(d)-listed water bodies is described in the TCEQ regulatory guidance document Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (January 2003, RG-194). Impairments are limited to the geographic area described by the Assessment Unit and identified with a six or seven-digit AU_ID. A TMDL for each impaired parameter will be developed to allocate pollutant loads from contributing sources that affect the parameter of concern in each Assessment Unit. The TMDL will be identified and counted using a six or seven-digit AU_ID. Water Quality permits that are issued before a TMDL is approved will not increase pollutant loading that would contribute to the impairment identified for the Assessment Unit. Explanation of Column Headings SegID and Name: The unique identifier (SegID), segment name, and location of the water body. The SegID may be one of two types of numbers. The first type is a classified segment number (4 digits, e.g., 0218), as defined in Appendix A of the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (TSWQS).
    [Show full text]
  • Water Delivery Study Pecos River, Texas, Quantity and Quality, 1967
    TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD REPORT 76 WATER DELIVERY STUDY PECOS RIVER, TEXAS, QUANTITY AND QUALITY, 1967 By R. U. Grozier, H. R. Hejl, Jr., and C. H. Hembree United States Geological Survey Prepared by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Texas Water Development Board , May 1968 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION. •.•••••••••••••••••••.••••.•••••••••••••••••••.••...•.•.•... 1 Purpose and Scope................................................... 1 Previous roves tigat ions.... .. .. 1 GENERAL GEOLOGy............................................... .....•....• 5 HYDROLOGY. ..•.••..•••.••.••...•.•.........••...•.••..••.•..••.•••..•..... 5 Reach from Red Bluff Reservoir (Mile 0) to Pecos (Mile 71.8)........ 6 Reach from Pecos (Mile 71.8) to State Highway 18 near Grandfalls (Mile 127.4)........................................... 8 Reach from State Highway 18 near Grandfalls (Mile 127.4) to Girvin (Mile 188.4)............................................ 8 WATER QUALITY AND USE.................................................... 9 General............................................................. 9 DOllEstic............................................................ 9 IndustriaL......................................................... 10 Irrigation........................ 10 SUMMARY. .•.•••.•..••.•••.......••............••..•••..••..••.•........•.. 10 REFERENCES. .•.....••••.••..••.•...•.•••..••••.••.••.••••.•.•.•.•......... 12 TABLES 1. Summary of water discharge measurements and chloride concentrations, Pecos River water-delivery
    [Show full text]
  • MEXICO Las Moras Seco Creek K Er LAVACA MEDINA US HWY 77 Springs Uvalde LEGEND Medina River
    Cedar Creek Reservoir NAVARRO HENDERSON HILL BOSQUE BROWN ERATH 281 RUNNELS COLEMAN Y ANDERSON S HW COMANCHE U MIDLAND GLASSCOCK STERLING COKE Colorado River 3 7 7 HAMILTON LIMESTONE 2 Y 16 Y W FREESTONE US HW W THE HIDDEN HEART OF TEXAS H H S S U Y 87 U Waco Lake Waco McLENNAN San Angelo San Angelo Lake Concho River MILLS O.H. Ivie Reservoir UPTON Colorado River Horseshoe Park at San Felipe Springs. Popular swimming hole providing relief from hot Texas summers. REAGAN CONCHO U S HW Photo courtesy of Gregg Eckhardt. Y 183 Twin Buttes McCULLOCH CORYELL L IRION Reservoir 190 am US HWY LAMPASAS US HWY 87 pasas R FALLS US HWY 377 Belton U S HW TOM GREEN Lake B Y 67 Brady iver razos R iver LEON Temple ROBERTSON Lampasas Stillhouse BELL SAN SABA Hollow Lake Salado MILAM MADISON San Saba River Nava BURNET US HWY 183 US HWY 190 Salado sota River Lake TX HWY 71 TX HWY 29 MASON Buchanan N. San G Springs abriel Couple enjoying the historic mill at Barton Springs in 1902. R Mason Burnet iver Photo courtesy of Center for American History, University of Texas. SCHLEICHER MENARD Y 29 TX HW WILLIAMSON BRAZOS US HWY 83 377 Llano S. S an PECOS Gabriel R US HWY iver Georgetown US HWY 163 Llano River Longhorn Cavern Y 79 Sonora LLANO Inner Space Caverns US HW Eckert James River Bat Cave US HWY 95 Lake Lyndon Lake Caverns B. Johnson Junction Travis CROCKETT of Sonora BURLESON 281 GILLESPIE BLANCO Y KIMBLE W TRAVIS SUTTON H GRIMES TERRELL S U US HWY 290 US HWY 16 US HWY P Austin edernales R Fredericksburg Barton Springs 21 LEE Somerville Lake AUSTIN Pecos
    [Show full text]
  • Prize Bridge 1960 •
    PRIZE BRIDGE 1960 • Prize Bridges 1960 Steel b1'idges selected tn the annual national competition conducted by the Ame1'ican Insti­ tute of Steel Const1'uction as the most beautiful b~'idges opened to traffic in 1960. • AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, INC. 101 Park Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. • • ~ury of Award A. L. AYDELOTT, AlA A. L. Aydelott and Associates, Architects Memphis, Tennessee THOMAS S. BUECHNER Director The Brooklyn Museum Brooklyn, New YOl'k GLENN W. HOLCOMB President American Society of Civil Engineers Professor, Civil Engineering Oregon State University • Corvallis, Oregon GEORGE LINDSTROM Lundstrom & Skubic, Architects Chicago, Illinois GEOFFREY PLATT, FAIA Architect New York City, New York 'J ; • Beauty in Steel Bridges The enduring beauty of steel bridges is eloquent tribute to the vision and skill of the men who plan, design and build them. The bridge de igner of today is both artist and engineer. He understands the potential for strength and beauty which is inherent in steel structures, and he knows that aesthetic appearance can be achieved at no sacrifice of efficiency or economy. The simple grace of a highway overpass, no less than the majestic sweep of a river crossing reflects a creative integration of structure, func­ tion and form, skillfully executed in beautiful bridges of steel. To promote a more widespread appreciation of the aesthetics of steel bridges and to honor the architectural excellence of modern bridge design, the American Institute of Steel Construction sponsors an annual Prize Brid'ge Competition. Each year a distinguished Jury of Award, composed of leading art directors, architects and engineers, selects the steel bridges which it judges to be the most beautiful of those opened to traffic in the • United States during the previous year.
    [Show full text]
  • Salt Sources, Loading and Salinity of the Pecos River
    INFLUENCE OF TRIBUTARIES ON SALINITY OF AMISTAD INTERNATIONAL RESERVOIR S. Miyamoto, Fasong Yuan and Shilpa Anand Texas A&M University Agricultural Research Center at El Paso Texas Agricultural Experiment Station An Investigatory Report Submitted to Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency In a partial fulfillment of A contract TSSWCB, No. 04-11 and US EPA, No. 4280001 Technical Report TR – 292 April 2006 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The study reported here was performed under a contract with the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB Project No. 04-11) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA Project No. 4280001). The overall project is entitled “Basin-wide Management Plan for the Pecos River in Texas”. The materials presented here apply to Subtask 1.6; “River Salinity Modeling”. The cost of exploratory soil sample analyses was defrayed in part by the funds from the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture under Agreement No. 2005-34461-15661. The main data set used for this study came from an open file available from the U.S. Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission (US- IBWC), and some from the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). Administrative support to this project was provided by the Texas Water Resource Institute (TWRI). Logistic support to this project was provided by Jessica N. White and Olivia Navarrete, Student Assistants. This document was reviewed by Nancy Hanks of the Texas Clean Rivers Program (TCRP), Gilbert Anaya of the US-IBWC, and Kevin Wagner of the Texas Water Resource Institute (TWRI).
    [Show full text]
  • A Watershed Protection Plan for the Pecos River in Texas
    AA WWaatteerrsshheedd PPrrootteeccttiioonn PPll aann ffoorr tthhee PPeeccooss RRiivveerr iinn TTeexxaass October 2008 A Watershed Protection Plan for the Pecos River in Texas Funded By: Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (Project 04-11) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Investigating Agencies: Texas AgriLife Extension Service Texas AgriLife Research International Boundary and Water Commission, U.S. Section Texas Water Resources Institute Prepared by: Lucas Gregory, Texas Water Resources Institute and Will Hatler, Texas AgriLife Extension Service Funding for this project was provided through a Clean Water Act §319(h) Nonpoint Source Grant from the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Acknowledgments The Investigating Agencies would like to take this opportunity to thank the many individuals who have contributed to the success of this project. The development of this watershed protection plan would not have been possible without the cooperation and consolidation of efforts from everyone involved. First, we would like to thank the many landowners and other interested parties who have attended project meetings, participated in surveys, and provided invaluable input that has guided the development of this document. Your interest in this project and the Pecos River was and will continue to be instrumental in ensuring the future restoration and improvement of the health of this important natural resource. While there are too many of you to name here, we hope that your interest, involvement, and willingness to implement needed management measures will grow as progress is made and new phases of the watershed protection plan are initiated. Our gratitude is extended to the following individuals who have contributed their support, technical expertise, time, and/or advice during the project: Greg Huber, J.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Trophic Classification of Texas Reservoirs
    Trophic Classification of Texas Reservoirs 2018 Texas Integrated Report for Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d) The primary productivity of reservoirs, as indicated by the amount of nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen) and the extent of algae (suspended, floating, and attached) and rooted aquatic plants, can have a significant effect on water quality. Up to a point, nutrients promote ecosystem production and healthy growth of algae, larger plants, and fish and other aquatic organisms. However, excess nutrients and algae in reservoirs can have a deleterious effect on water quality, and algae can reach nuisance levels that potentially (1) create nuisance aesthetic conditions, (2) cause taste and odor in drinking water sources, (3) contribute to reduced dissolved oxygen as algae decay, and (4) and ultimately reduce the ability of a water body to support healthy, diverse aquatic communities. Eutrophication refers to an overall condition characterized by an accumulation of nutrients that support relatively elevated growth of algae and other organisms. Eutrophication is primarily influenced by the physical and hydrological characteristics of the water body and can be affected by natural processes and human activities in the surrounding watershed. Human activities can accelerate the eutrophication process by i ncreasing the rate at which nutrients and organic substances enter impoundments and surrounding watersheds. Discharges of treated sewage, agricultural and urban runoff, leaking septic tanks, and erosion of stream banks can increase the flow of nutrients and organic substances into reservoirs. In comparison to natural lakes in northern states, the eutrophication process in southern reservoirs is often enhanced by (1 ) warm climates with long growing seasons, (2) soils and geologic substrates that create high concentrations of sediment and nutrients in rainfall runoff, and (3) relatively high ri ver inflows on main stem impoundments.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality and the Composition of Fish and Macroinvertebrate Communities in the Devils and Pecos Rivers in and Upstream From
    Prepared in cooperation with the National Park Service and Amistad National Recreation Area Water Quality and the Composition of Fish and Macroinvertebrate Communities in the Devils and Pecos Rivers In and Upstream from the Amistad National Recreation Area, Texas, 2005–7 Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5038 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover Left. Dolan Falls on the Devils River, Texas. Cover Right. Photo was taken where the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) gaging station near Langtry is located. The wier dam where the gage sensor is located is in the picture. Water Quality and the Composition of Fish and Macroinvertebrate Communities in the Devils and Pecos Rivers In and Upstream from the Amistad National Recreation Area, Texas, 2005–7 By J. Bruce Moring Prepared in cooperation with the National Park Service and Amistad National Recreation Area Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5038 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012 This and other USGS information products are available at http://store.usgs.gov/ U.S. Geological Survey Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 To learn about the USGS and its information products visit http://www.usgs.gov/ 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.
    [Show full text]
  • TEXAS, PLAINTIFF V
    No. 65, Original In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF TEXAS, PLAINTIFF v. STATE OF NEW MEXICO ON REVIEW OF THE RIVER MASTER’S 2018 FINAL DETERMINATION MOTION FOR REVIEW OF RIVER MASTER’S FINAL DETERMINATION KEN PAXTON KYLE D. HAWKINS Attorney General of Texas Solicitor General Counsel of Record JEFFREY C. MATEER First Assistant Attorney HEATHER GEBELIN HACKER General Assistant Solicitor General OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL P.O. Box 12548 (MC 059) Austin, Texas 78711-2548 [email protected] (512) 936-1700 QUESTIONS PRESENTED To resolve disputes about use of the Pecos River, Texas and New Mexico entered into the Pecos River Compact. This Court subsequently entered an amended decree ordering New Mexico to comply with its Com- pact obligations and appointing a River Master to per- form the annual calculations of New Mexico’s water- delivery obligations. The Court’s decree specifies exact procedures for objecting to the River Master’s annual reports. In par- ticular, a party must seek this Court’s review of any fi- nal determination of the River Master within 30 days. Likewise, the decree allows modifying the manual gov- erning the River Master’s calculations only by specified procedures. In 2014 and 2015, a federally owned reservoir in New Mexico impounded and held large amounts of flood waters dumped in the Pecos Basin by heavy rains. When the reservoir’s authority to hold the water for flood-control purposes expired, the reservoir began to release it. Texas did not use this water, nor could it. The downstream reservoir in Texas was already full from holding flood water, so Texas had to release water, wasted, to make room for the water flowing in from New Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Mexico Water Resources: the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo Example
    U.S. Mexico Water Resources: The Rio Grande/Rio Bravo example 12 Great Rivers of North America: The Rio Grande is the fourth-longest river in North America (1,885 miles, 3,034 km). It begins in the San Juan Mountains of southern Colorado, then flows south through New Mexico. It forms the natural border between Texas and Mexico as it flows southeast to the Gulf of Mexico. In Mexico it is known as Rio Bravo del Norte. http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/nariv.htm Rio Grande: One river or two? • Shared between two nations • Has two names • Basin did not become integrated (the entire river system did not connect) until recently (a few hundred thousand years ago) • Today the river again does not flow uninterrupted to the sea • Upper Rio Grande and Lower Rio Grande/Rio Bravo • Should be renamed Rio Poco or Rio Importante? Topics to be discussed • Human History • Geologic Evolution and Hydrology of the Upper Rio Grande • Water Resources in the 21st Century: The Challenges facing the Lower Rio Grande History to 1850 A.D. World Heritage Sites in the U.S. http://whc.unesco.org/heritage.htm *Mesa Verde (SW Colorado; 6th to 12th Century Anasazi ruins) Yellowstone Grand Canyon National Park Everglades National Park Independence Hall Redwood National Park Mammoth Cave National Park Olympic National Park *Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site (NE of St. Louis;9th-15th century) Great Smoky Mountains National Park La Fortaleza & San Juan Historic Site Puerto Rico Statue of Liberty Yosemite National Park Monticello and University of Virginia in Charlottesville *Chaco Culture National Historic Park (NW New Mexico; 850-1250 A.D.) Hawaii Volcanoes National Park *Pueblo de Taos Carlsbad Caverns National Park (N.
    [Show full text]